TED Conversations

Jeffrey Fadness

This conversation is closed.

Are we as a species like a viral infection that will eventually destroy its host...?

Modern man can trace its origins back some 200,000 years, at least anatomically, and 50,000 years back in behavioral modernity. Yet in just 211 years, from 1800 to 2011, human population grew from 1 billion to 7 billion souls. In the year 2011 alone, it's estimate that 135 million human beings were born, 57 million died, resulting in a net population increase of 78 million people in just one year! That's an average increase of nearly 214 thousand people daily, or ~8,900 per hour.

Assuming the rate of population growth stays constant, at this pace global population will double to more than 14 billion people in just the next 10 years. And then what? Do we double once again to 30 billion+ by the year 2033?

And will population growth actually continue to accelerate, with less attrition from continued gains in life expectancy through better health care and medical science?

Clearly, all these folks are going to need food, shelter, and things to do. More cars, streets, shopping and entertainment centers, business centers, government centers, learning centers, clothing, homes and the list goes on and on!

We as a species have been incredibly successful; much of which has come at the expense and impact upon other species, and our environment.

The Earth is a finite space with finite resources. How does this all play out? Do we eventually deplete and destroy our Host -- Mother Earth? What are the implications and what are the solutions...?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Mar 5 2013: "Assuming the rate of population growth stays constant,"

    assuming we have magic powers, we can survive everything. assumptions does no good unless backed up by data. and data shows that population will level out at 9 bn. http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html

    with technology advancing, the earth easily can feed 100 bn in a foreseeable future. or even a trillion. we don't really see any reasonable upper limit.
    • thumb

      Gail . 50+

      • +1
      Mar 6 2013: Nearly 1 billion people are malnourished, and a child dies of hunger every 11 seconds. These people are hungry NOW (and that is a fact). Most of the progress in reducing this was achieved before 2007/08. Since then, global progress in reducing hunger has slowed (according to recently published UN report)

      Global warming is real and it is intensifying (regardless of cause). More and more land is being turned into desert that can't produce food. That is happening NOW. Combine global warming with population growth NOW and the trend must shift back.

      The dwarf wheat that was developed to produce more yield to feed more people is addictive. Malnutrition is moving into developed countries. We must find another way NOW if all who are alive will survive.

      When I was born, the world's population was only 2.5 billion (and I'm not that old). Now its 3 times that. The changes that are necessary to accommodate the human infestation produce horrible consequences. Do you really want to live in an overcrowded nest? All studies looking at unrestricted population grown in a finite area (which earth is) show that overcrowded societies are horribly violent places.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.